Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you very much for your letter in regard to the above mentioned shipment.  Due to the high volume of parcels coursing through the courier network each day, undergoing continuous processing and handling, certain packages may experience delays or even can get lost in the course of this journey. Please note that due to the time that has passed, this shipment has been declared as lost.  I have today processed the claim and made offers to the value of £75 as a goodwill gesture without prejudice. I do acknowledge that you have mentioned in your letter that the value was higher, however, you did not take out any protection to that amount. The protection for this shipment was £20 and we will not be increasing our goodwill offer any further.    Please log into your account online in order to accept our offer. Once accepted, our accounts department will process the claim accordingly. The claim payment will be processed and received within 7 working days.                                  In addition, a refund of the carriage fee will be processed as a separate payment and will be received within 3 working days.  If I can further assist, please feel free to contact me.   I have also just noticed that yesterday afternoon they sent me an email stating that "after my request" they have refunded the cost of shipping. I did not request the refund so will mention that in my letter as well.
    • Hi I had to leave Dubai back in 2011, during the financial crisis. And only now have I received a letter from IDRWW. Is this anything to worry about about as I have 2 years left until it’s been 15 years(statute barred in Dubai). Worried as just got a mortgage 2 years ago. Could they force me in to bankruptcy? Red lots of different threads on here. And unsure what true and what isn’t. 
    • Not that TOR will see this now he's thrown in the hand grenade. Rayner has plenty of female supporters on X, for a start. As for the council and HMRC, fair enough and I thought Rayner was already in touch with them. That's where it should be dealt with, not the police force. @tobyjugg2 Daniel Finkelstein thinks the same as you about tax. The Fiver theory. How the Fiver Theory explains this election campaign ARCHIVE.PH archived 28 May 2024 17:36:51 UTC  
    • Often with the Likes of Lowells/ Overdales that 'proof' doesn't stand up to scrutiny.   Think about it like a game of poker, they want to intimidate you into folding and giving up as soon as possible, and just get you to pay up and roll over, that is their business model, make you think your cards are rubbish. What they don't expect, and their business isn't set up for it, is for a defendant to find this place and to learn that they have an amazing set of cards to play. Overdales don't have an infinite number of lawyers, paralegals etc, and the time / money to spend on expensive court cases, that they are highly likely to lose, hence how hard they will try to get you to roll over.  Even to the extent of faking documents, which they need to do because the debts that they purchased were so cheap, in the first place. Nevertheless it works in most cases, most people chicken out, when they are so close to winning, and a holding defence is like slowly showing Overdales your first card, and a marker of intention that this could get tricky for them. In fact it may be,  although by no means guaranteed that it won't even go any further than that.  Even if it does, what they send you back will almost certainly have more holes than Swiss Cheese, and if with the help you receive here, you can identify those weaknesses and get the whole thing tossed in the bin.
    • So Rayner who is don’t forget still being investigated by the local council and HMRC  is now begging to save her seat Not a WOMAN in sight in this video other than Rayner  Farage is utterly correct this country’s values are non existent in her seat   Rayner Pleads With Muslim Voters as Pressure From Galloway Grows – Guido Fawkes ORDER-ORDER.COM Guido has obtained a leaked tape from inside a meeting between Angela Rayner and Muslim voters in Ashton-under-Lyne...  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

UKPC and DEBT RECOVERY PLUS


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5375 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

i have a parking ticket sent to me in the post by UKPC for parking in catford island retail park.There was a sign clearly stating that there was two hours free parking .. my son parked for 15 mins and the car is registered to his father. There was no parking ticket place on my car the only thing i heard about it was a letter from UKPC stating i owed £90.

Then a very strongly worded letter from Debt Recovery Plus stating it is a legal requiremnt to send notice of intended litigation... i was not the driver only the owner and i have a photo of the sign at the premises that clearly states i my vehicle was allowed to pqark for 2 hours...and it stayed for 15 mins !! what to do and what letter to use???:-x:-x

Link to post
Share on other sites

what to do

do nowt, nil, nadda

 

and what letter to use???

Not worth bothering with. It's been found on CAG over time that the PPCs don't even bother to read whatever letter you send them. To be honest, I think we are still awaiting evidence that anyone in the PPCs can actually read.

 

 

 

Ignore them completely

Link to post
Share on other sites

You will probably get a few letters from them, the "debt Collection agency" on the next desk and possibly even get one from the "solicitors" (that's the tea-monkey).

Ignore them all!

Eventually they will give up and hound someone who is not so wise.

 

Bear in mind that you have not received a fine, you have received an unenforcible [problem] invoice.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just confirm i should ignore them and not even bother send them a letter to tell them that i was not driving???Can they pursue this in the court or send baliff as they threatened??? firstly i did not get a ticket on the car..secondly i was not driving... thirdly it stated that parking could be for 2 hours free the car was there for 15 mins!!! and finally shall i bother telling them this or really just ignore them with no repercussions???

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah you can ignore it... as said here you're going to get all sorts of letters.. Its not a debt so they can't do anything to your credit file or give you a CCJ as it has to go to court first. They are well aware that you may not be the driver so they are just trying it on.

 

It is the first thing a court would ask and it would be thrown out on those grounds!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you admit you are the driver, then you are admitting that you breached the terms of the supposed contract... this is usually a flaw in the whole [problem] because they send the ticket to the registered keeper who is not necessarly the driver! By admitting in a letter you are the driver it seems to give the PPCs a bit of encouragement to take things further!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just confirm i should ignore them and not even bother send them a letter to tell them that i was not driving???

 

No, a complete waste of your time and money.

 

Can they pursue this in the court

 

Yes, but they won't

 

or send baliff as they threatened???

 

To get to the baliff stage, they first have to take you to court (see above). Then they have to win:lol::lol::lol:

Then you have to fail to pay the judgement, then and only then they apply for enforcement and the bailiff gets involved.

 

firstly i did not get a ticket on the car..secondly i was not driving...

 

Then they have absolutely no case against you. Under no circumstances contact them especially do not identify the driver.

thirdly it stated that parking could be for 2 hours free the car was there for 15 mins!!! and finally shall i bother telling them this or really just ignore them with no repercussions???

 

Just ignore them, give them nothing to go on, and nowhere to go.

 

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you admit you are the driver, then you are admitting that you breached the terms of the supposed contract... this is usually a flaw in the whole [problem] because they send the ticket to the registered keeper who is not necessarly the driver! By admitting in a letter you are the driver it seems to give the PPCs a bit of encouragement to take things further!

 

LONDONCASS: What do you mean?

 

Got to try and sleep soon!........................

Link to post
Share on other sites

but a case was taken to court in the past and the PPC won because the defendant admitted to being the driver on a forum!

 

The PPC won because the defendant had a poor defence and dwelled on the driver side of things.

 

If you weren't the driver, great. You have a cast iron defence.

 

If you were the driver, don't spend your time dodging the issue and looking bad. Concentrate on the myriad of defences regarding the unenforceability of the charge.

 

It is the driver who breached the contract

 

And what is the remedy for alleged breach of contract...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

and the remedy is?........

 

.... to return the claimant (landowner) to the same position he would have been in had the breach of contract not taken place.

 

i.e. if you overstayed in a free carpark by 5 minutes, then you should compenstate the landowner (not a 3rd party PPC) for the revenue he has lost by you using the car park for too long. Loss = 0

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit confused though, do I have to conpensate the landowner whoever that is now or later?

 

How would the landowner be loss=0?

 

Probably being thick here but if I understood it I would probably be a lawyer!

 

I will in time make a donation to this site BUT I cant do paypal so may get the wife to register and do it for me(long story)!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What crem is saying that this is a civil matter. This means that you can not be taken to court and made to pay a fine or a penalty, as that would be a punishment and no joe blogs can impose a penalty on another.

 

If the car park charged £1 per hour, and you paid £1, but stayed for two, then the landowner could take you to court for breach of contract, and only sue you for its loss because of it... which would be £1 (for the second hour). He could not charge you £70 for a PCN etc. because the only loss incurred would be the £1 if someone else had actually used the space and paid!

 

If it's a free car park, then they lost £0 by you overstaying because if someone else had come along, they would have been doing it for free too!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...